Why is Cannabis still illegal?
Discussion
Zoon said:
The reason it is still illegal is that it is far too easy to grow your own, without giving the government a slice of tax. Yes I know you can make your own beer/wine, but it is far harder to make something decent that you will actually want to drink.
It's harder to grow than tobacco and no one really does that. Most people even buy tailors rather than a pouch of baccy because they're lazy. If you legalise it I guarantee the vast majority will be buying, not growing. andymadmak said:
remkingston said:
Where's your evidence?
Except that table is far from accurate. But that image I posted before was just one off of a search for "alcohol vs cannabis" where they are all following a similar rhetoric. Are they all wrong is there some underlying truth in them?
HRL said:
Legalise it, tax it, increase penalties for all other illegal drugs.
What a strange argument. Surely if you think cannabis should be legal, it must follow that other low-harm drugs such as Magic Mushrooms and MDMA, should also be? Why on earth would you increase the penalty on those?John145 said:
Jasandjules said:
John145 said:
Having met several people long term users, I can understand why it's illegal. Psychology is very difficult to objectify, subjective assessment is much easier.
Ever seen an alchoholic? Ever seen the damage caused by drunk people on the average Friday night in any High Street in any town?Or someone who smokes? Or their end of life patterns?
The damage to the brain is irreparable and imo is the most important organ in the human body. Yes alcoholism destroys the brain but its much rarer to be an alcoholic than to have the brain damaged by marijuana, when you consider the ratio of users to problems.
I don't believe the scientific evidence I've seen because from my personal experience, it's wrong. I put the error down to the method of experimentation and the use of flaky statistics.
I know people who have had drink problems. I know more people who dont. I know people who have died of direct and indirect consequences of alcohol.
I know people who use cannabis. I don't know anyone that has died because of it nor does anyone else in the world keeping figures.
JS748 said:
Would it not be better if they bought regulated cannabis with labelled THC levels? Plus if you buy from a legal store, they will not have other more dangerous drugs for sale.
I would agree with that.It would be a very good tax income for the government, but I can understand the issues with the core voters not understanding the policy change.
remkingston said:
John145 said:
Jasandjules said:
John145 said:
Having met several people long term users, I can understand why it's illegal. Psychology is very difficult to objectify, subjective assessment is much easier.
Ever seen an alchoholic? Ever seen the damage caused by drunk people on the average Friday night in any High Street in any town?Or someone who smokes? Or their end of life patterns?
The damage to the brain is irreparable and imo is the most important organ in the human body. Yes alcoholism destroys the brain but its much rarer to be an alcoholic than to have the brain damaged by marijuana, when you consider the ratio of users to problems.
I don't believe the scientific evidence I've seen because from my personal experience, it's wrong. I put the error down to the method of experimentation and the use of flaky statistics.
I know people who have had drink problems. I know more people who dont. I know people who have died of direct and indirect consequences of alcohol.
I know people who use cannabis. I don't know anyone that has died because of it nor does anyone else in the world keeping figures.
John145 said:
Maybe I could've phrased myself better. TBH I don't find a lot of my time researching or concerning myself with the issue, I just know that I'd prefer it to stay illegal and I believe (as I don't know and will not be able to find the answer) less people will come to harm this way.
It's cool John. I know where you're coming from bud 
I still stand by the fact that what is being purchased on the street at the moment are very strong THC strains. The equivalent of people buying absinthe but consuming it as beer. With this in mind it isn't surprising that it can trigger problems.
With it being properly regulated (like in some US states and Amsterdam) then people are able to make an informed choice.
It is all a bit silly, it's silly smoking weed but also silly making it illegal. I smoked a LOT of weed in my late teens, I still managed to get through college and university, infact had I smoked less and spent less time playing on the Megadrive, reading stoner literature and playing guitar and gone out a bit more, taken more of an interest in girls and been more sociable (i.e had a life) maybe I wouldn't have got through college and university. Eventually my mental health did suffer and I stopped smoking weed and it wasn't that hard to do, people who claim it doesn't effect your mental health or life haven't smoked enough.
It's not a great hobby, but not dangerous or particularly damaging, the fact its illegal reflects what the message should be - which is what I want my kids to understand - there are better ways of wasting your time. But whilst alcohol, motorbikes and skydiving are legal the message is sort of absurd, and my kids will be persuaded to practice self discipline in all their activities, illegal or otherwise. (I've enjoyed alcohol, motorbikes and skydiving too)
It's not a great hobby, but not dangerous or particularly damaging, the fact its illegal reflects what the message should be - which is what I want my kids to understand - there are better ways of wasting your time. But whilst alcohol, motorbikes and skydiving are legal the message is sort of absurd, and my kids will be persuaded to practice self discipline in all their activities, illegal or otherwise. (I've enjoyed alcohol, motorbikes and skydiving too)
Years ago, hydroponics were not so advanced or so cheap, so whilst there was a bit of 'home growing', most of it seemed to be imported. It was quite mostly mild weed (e.g. Bush or Thai stick) or slate (mild, fairly crappy hash), and unless you were 'connected' it was tough to get hold of skunk or the more 'posh' types of hash. It seems now, when people talk of weed, it's all about the skunk, the stronger the better, mostly grown in the UK. Ultra strong stuff too. Skunk is probably quite dangerous, long term. Weed to a lesser extent, perhaps. This is all conjecture, obvs.
Legalisation will probably never happen, but there's growing evidence from around the world that decriminalisation (a la Portugal and an increasing number of US states) is actually a positive step forward. Portugal appears to prefer a 'treatment' approach to all recreational drugs - if you are caught possessing, you have it taken from you and asked to participate in a treatment program (paid for by the reduction of policing budget I understand), and from most reports it seems to be working. All credit to the Portugese gov't that took that (probably deeply unpopular) first step and had the guts to stick with it and appears that the results speak for themselves.
If that step is too far, perhaps a policy of education and sympathetic treatment of users could be considered - David Nutt got into a lot of trouble, but he has continues to forge his path and his organisation now has no-nonsense advice on them available to anyone, effectively allowing people to make their own decisions. http://www.drugscience.org.uk/
In addition, I worry to some extent what the zero tolerance of recreational drugs is doing - as soon as a newly synthesised drug comes out, it is around for a few months, then made illegal. The chemical composition is changed slightly, and so is not strictly illegal (for example, 2-CB then becomes 2-CI), until the next round. These newly synthesised drugs have no testing or any long term usage study and could actually be more dangerous than the 'old fashioned' recreational drugs. It's ludicrous.
Legalisation will probably never happen, but there's growing evidence from around the world that decriminalisation (a la Portugal and an increasing number of US states) is actually a positive step forward. Portugal appears to prefer a 'treatment' approach to all recreational drugs - if you are caught possessing, you have it taken from you and asked to participate in a treatment program (paid for by the reduction of policing budget I understand), and from most reports it seems to be working. All credit to the Portugese gov't that took that (probably deeply unpopular) first step and had the guts to stick with it and appears that the results speak for themselves.
If that step is too far, perhaps a policy of education and sympathetic treatment of users could be considered - David Nutt got into a lot of trouble, but he has continues to forge his path and his organisation now has no-nonsense advice on them available to anyone, effectively allowing people to make their own decisions. http://www.drugscience.org.uk/
In addition, I worry to some extent what the zero tolerance of recreational drugs is doing - as soon as a newly synthesised drug comes out, it is around for a few months, then made illegal. The chemical composition is changed slightly, and so is not strictly illegal (for example, 2-CB then becomes 2-CI), until the next round. These newly synthesised drugs have no testing or any long term usage study and could actually be more dangerous than the 'old fashioned' recreational drugs. It's ludicrous.
Edited by Tonsko on Thursday 30th July 11:14
John145 said:
Yes, obviously, and pretty much everyone I know drinks alcohol. Only one person I know personally smokes cannabis. Surprising none of my friends (drinkers) are alcoholics. Every person I've met who regularly smoke weed and the one I know closely, all are "odd".
The damage to the brain is irreparable and imo is the most important organ in the human body. Yes alcoholism destroys the brain but its much rarer to be an alcoholic than to have the brain damaged by marijuana, when you consider the ratio of users to problems.
I don't believe the scientific evidence I've seen because from my personal experience, it's wrong. I put the error down to the method of experimentation and the use of flaky statistics.
Do you have any evidence for this statement? The damage to the brain is irreparable and imo is the most important organ in the human body. Yes alcoholism destroys the brain but its much rarer to be an alcoholic than to have the brain damaged by marijuana, when you consider the ratio of users to problems.
I don't believe the scientific evidence I've seen because from my personal experience, it's wrong. I put the error down to the method of experimentation and the use of flaky statistics.
According to Alcohol Concern the NHS estimates around 9% of the UK male population are alcohol dependent. That's around 3million men. Doesn't sound very rare.
BJG1 said:
HRL said:
Legalise it, tax it, increase penalties for all other illegal drugs.
What a strange argument. Surely if you think cannabis should be legal, it must follow that other low-harm drugs such as Magic Mushrooms and MDMA, should also be? Why on earth would you increase the penalty on those?Weed is safer and less harmful than alcohol, and that's a fact.
Richyboy said:
Corporations seem to dictate government policy so it will never be legal here. Alcohol profits alone would fall over night, no way they'd allow legalisation. I wish an exception could be made for shopping bags to be made from
Hemp.
There is enough money being made in Colorado and Washington state at the moment for a pretty large company to emerge as market leaders... It will happen, the US will end up with a large company who specialise in growing and marketing weed or a cigarette company like Phillip Morris will move into that space... What could possibly go wrong???Hemp.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff